I would have to disagree with any quote attributed to AA from the book I, Anastasia. AA never spoke in such complete terms about her past (See Rathlef's collection of sentences in her work.) Having read the book one can almost tell which parts are statements made by AA (Due to her odd phrasing etc) and the parts that (I wholeheartedly) think her lawyers took liberty to create. For instance the "recollections" about the Imperial family's time in Tobolsk were obviously lifted from (If memory serves) Robert Wilton's book. Others were as well. I do not even think it was done maliciously since I believe her lawyers believed AA was who she claimed and so they filled in the gaps in her "memories". Unless you have the original source material from which these quotes were supposedly taken I do not think any quotes from that book are of any merit, since they cannot accurately/verifiably be attributed to AA.

[It is somewhat ironic that when I first mentioned (On another forum, long ago) that AA had erroneously told Harriet von Rathlef-Keilmann that Anastasia's English tutor Sydney Gibbes was somewhat deformed and walked with a limp that I was told by supporters that perhaps Harriet had transcribed it wrong, after all, they said we do not have recordings of these statements. So suddenly Harriet von Rathlef-Keilmann was unreliable even by those who used her book as a bible. Also it was suggested that Harriet von Rathlef-Keilmann must have incorrectly recorded AA's statement that the Empress's closest friend,Anna Vyroubova was a red head (which she was not). Using this logic how could one ever be certain of any of AA's recorded statements? Luckily for us AA reiterated her statements about Gibbes after meeting him some thirty years later and thus verifying the accuracy of Harriet von Rathlef-Keilmann's account.]

You are right on many points here. As long as we do not have an actual recording, small details may be incorrect. Remember that Harriet Rathlef Keilmann never dared to write anything down in front of AA, but made notes afterwards.
As for Anna Virubouva's hair, I have seen her described as ash blond and brown. Maybe the lady enjoyed coloring her hair?
As for the description from Tobolsk, AA never said that they went upstairs for coffee. She only mentioned that "we others went down again while my brother rested." She did not say that the Tsar liked to sit on the platform over the Orangerie in stormy weather, but that "we liked to sit there in the sun." So I don't know if the statements have been borrowed or not.
As for incorrect statements, you will find errors in most accounts of the life at the court by others who wrote their memoirs. But while the AA opponents seem to gloss over these, they demand that everything AA said has to be true and verified, otherwise she is an impostor. Even Gilliard gets away with his glaring omissions of truth to the tune of "Oh, maybe he doesn't remember. So what."

It is not what she remembered or not, it is that her DNA is wrong. Remember, when this was started, the double helix was not part of the scenario. What she remembered or was taught could be pulled off. Then came science.

She even gave her as a present Grand Duchess Marie's personal photo album. So don't even try to tell anyone that she did not recognize her niece.

I thought it was Tatiana Botkin who gave AA the album.

From Royal Russia:
The Grand Duchess Maria gave the album to her childhood friend, Tatiana Botkin. --- In 1926, Tatiana Botkin met Anna Anderson and, convinced that she was the Grand Duchess Anastasia, gave her the album.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChatNoir

"As an active aide-de-camp to the Tsar during the war, Andrew had been brought in close touch with Nicholas and Alexandra's children and had seen them at a later date than many others in the family." (Peter Kurth)
(Peter Kurth)

I've been going through Nicholas's diaries and Andrei doesn't seem to have been that close to N&A and their children.
In 1914 Andrei met the family 10 times (between 24th Jun to 28th Dec) as aide-de-camp on luncheons etc.
In 1915 he met the family only twice, first on 9th of January and for the second and last time on 29th of March.

From Royal Russia:
The Grand Duchess Maria gave the album to her childhood friend, Tatiana Botkin. --- In 1926, Tatiana Botkin met Anna Anderson and, convinced that she was the Grand Duchess Anastasia, gave her the album.

You know, you are perfectly right. I see now in Peter Kurth that Olga gave AA one of her personal photo albums. Thank you for clearing that up.

Quote:

I've been going through Nicholas's diaries and Andrei doesn't seem to have been that close to N&A and their children.
In 1914 Andrei met the family 10 times (between 24th Jun to 28th Dec) as aide-de-camp on luncheons etc.
In 1915 he met the family only twice, first on 9th of January and for the second and last time on 29th of March.

That should be enough to recognize AA on sight. He did, in fact, see Anastasia later than some of the family. Thank you for posting this info.

It is not what she remembered or not, it is that her DNA is wrong. Remember, when this was started, the double helix was not part of the scenario. What she remembered or was taught could be pulled off. Then came science.

And who taught her to recognize the Tsar's cigarette holder? And even remember that the latest one he ordered, was rather dark? (Dark amber, as it turned out.)

That should be enough to recognize AA on sight. He did, in fact, see Anastasia later than some of the family.

That was 2 years before the revolution I am certain more people saw them more recently. It's not likely the entire family, who were very private, was included in luncheons with aide de camps. He was only one of many. It would be not be a family event and children under 16 were not included in official dinners, parties or functions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChatNoir

And who taught her to recognize the Tsar's cigarette holder? And even remember that the latest one he ordered, was rather dark? (Dark amber, as it turned out.)

Please sir tell me this story is not of more significance to you than the DNA. Perhaps the man who sold the holder himself was the source of the story. It hardly matters. The DNA did not match.

That was 2 years before the revolution I am certain more people saw them more recently. It's not likely the entire family, who were very private, was included in luncheons with aide de camps. He was only one of many. It would be not be a family event and children under 16 were not included in official dinners, parties or functions.

Yes, Olga saw them in 1916, but Irene, to my knowledge, did not see them after 1912. As for the lunches, I remember reading that Andrew saw the children at "family lunches", so it appears that the whole family was present, unless you can find something to prove the opposite.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OlgaNikolaievna

Please sir tell me this story is not of more significance to you than the DNA. Perhaps the man who sold the holder himself was the source of the story. It hardly matters. The DNA did not match.

We already know that the DNA did not match. But there are, as Olga said, many things that are not cleared up.
For your information, the cigarette holder was made at Alexander's in St. Petersburg.

Speaking of Aid-de-camps one should also recall another man who had held this position the Colonel Anatole Mordvinov. He can to visit AA during her stay with the Leuchtenbergs. He had seen Anastasia just prior to the Tsar's abdication. He had spent weeks the the Imperial Family (during trips etc) and knew all the Grand Duchesses well. His own daughter was the same age as Anastasia. The GD Leuchtenberg and Mordvinov agreed not to alert AA to his presence and he was stationed in a room by AA's. This was during one of the times Tatiana Botkin Melnik was visiting. Mordvinov concurred with the GD that while if AA was Anastasia it is possible that she could have changed drastically in appearance but it was obvious that the Colonel had alter very little since the time of the revolution and it should be very apparent to the real Anastasia precisely who he was. AA repeatedly saw the Colonel in the hall and asked Tatiana whether he was a German or a Russian (Fearing that he was there to test her) and gave no indication to Tatiana of any recognition. The Colonel eventually was sat down with AA and during the meeting brought out a cigar holder (which was rather plain) and AA showed no recognition of it. In fact the Grand Duchesses had given it to him and constantly harassed him every time they saw him ensuring he had not lost it. Tatiana even made a protective case for it out of her Mother's glove during captivity. Anastasia wrote to Mordvinov and especially mentioned it in the letter. AA never recognized the holder nor Mordvinov. Mordvinov emphatically stated that AA could not have been Anastasia, but also her manner of expression, point of view, etc. Not to put too fine a point on it, but Mordvinov knew Anastasia much better and intimately than Tatiana Botkin or for that matter her broth Gleb.

Yes, this is from False Anastasia, page 92 - 97. Consider the source. It is also mentioned in Peter Kurth. "I came here so hoping to find my Grand Duchess," said Mordvinov, "and what did I find?" He did not answer the question.
As for recognizing things, here is a snippet from Peter Kurth:
Another time she showed him (Gleb Botkin) a paper knife that had belonged to his father; Tatiana Botkin had given it to her in 1926 because it bore the crest of Empress Alexandra and had been presented to Dr. Botkin personally by the Empress.
"Have you ever seen this paper knife before?" AA asked innocently.
Gleb answered that it meant nothing to him, and AA squealed in delight: "Oh no!...If you are Gleb Botkin you must know where you have seen this paper knife. Otherwise I shall send you to Gilliard for identification."
(The knife was always lying on Dr. Botkin's desk, and Gleb saw it every day in the course of several years. Maybe he was a Polish factory worker after all.)

--
From Peter Kurth:
When Colonel Mordvinov, the former aide-de-camp to the Tsar, declares that 'the unknown Woman of Berlin' is not Anastasia, no one asks him when he last saw Anastasia or what reasons he might have had for refusing to acknowledge her. (It is known that Mordvinov abandoned the Tsar on the very day of his abdication.)

Yes, this is from False Anastasia, page 92 - 97. Consider the source. It is also mentioned in Peter Kurth. &quot;I came here so hoping to find my Grand Duchess,&quot; said Mordvinov, &quot;and what did I find?&quot; He did not answer the question.

I do consider the source that Mr. Kurth would be less likely to use emphasize information which cast a negative light on Anderson.

Quote:

As for recognizing things, here is a snippet from Peter Kurth:
Another time she showed him (Gleb Botkin) a paper knife that had belonged to his father; Tatiana Botkin had given it to her in 1926 because it bore the crest of Empress Alexandra and had been presented to Dr. Botkin personally by the Empress.
&quot;Have you ever seen this paper knife before?&quot; AA asked innocently.
Gleb answered that it meant nothing to him, and AA squealed in delight: &quot;Oh no!...If you are Gleb Botkin you must know where you have seen this paper knife. Otherwise I shall send you to Gilliard for identification.&quot;
(The knife was always lying on Dr. Botkin's desk, and Gleb saw it every day in the course of several years. Maybe he was a Polish factory worker after all.)

Or consider that Gleb is the one who put her up to it to impress people?

Quote:

We already know that the DNA did not match. But there are many things that are not cleared up.

So you are indeed saying that this silly holder story holds just as much weight to you as the DNA in the form of evidence?

And while we're at it: Who told her about the Tsarina writing with her diamond ring the year and initials on a window pane at Alexandria when they visited? I have never seen that in any book. And who told her about the swastika on the car, a detail neither Gilliard nor Volkov remembered?

Or consider that Gleb is the one who put her up to it to impress people?

Sigh, the more I read of the Botkins 'endorsements' the harder and harder it gets to believe they were innocently fooled. To say they were would mean that AA was incredibly smart and cunning on her own which I doubt. It would also mean that other people were behind the scenes giving her stuff to trick the Botkins, and there couldn't have been that many for that long. This story reeks of feeding, look at it, Tatiana B. gave her the knife! It's obvious she told her the story of it, whether or not Gleb really didn't remember it doesn't matter (but it probably was a setup to 'amaze' people with 'memories') Gleb was a very creative writer.

I also believe the 'funny animals' 'memory' was a setup. She was very close to Tatiana B. for over a year before she took up with Gleb but I am not naive enough to believe that he had no contact with his sister on the matter of AA during that time.

Sigh, the more I read of the Botkins 'endorsements' the harder and harder it gets to believe they were innocently fooled. To say they were would mean that AA was incredibly smart and cunning on her own which I doubt. It would also mean that other people were behind the scenes giving her stuff to trick the Botkins, and there couldn't have been that many for that long. This story reeks of feeding, look at it, Tatiana B. gave her the knife! It's obvious she told her the story of it, whether or not Gleb really didn't remember it doesn't matter (but it probably was a setup to 'amaze' people with 'memories') Gleb was a very creative writer.

So it doesn't matter whether Gleb remembered it or not. But it matters a whole lot when AA seemingly forgot little details. Double standard, anyone?

Quote:

I also believe the 'funny animals' 'memory' was a setup. She was very close to Tatiana B. for over a year before she took up with Gleb but I am not naive enough to believe that he had no contact with his sister on the matter of AA during that time.

That's what Gleb said, too. Tatiana told her. But the Leuchenbergs denied it, nobody knew anything about the animals but AA. Gleb mixed them all up, and she picked out the old ones that he made in Russia, "she seemed disturbed at seeing them, while she laughed at the others."

So it doesn't matter whether Gleb remembered it or not. But it matters a whole lot when AA seemingly forgot little details. Double standard, anyone?

What I mean is, since his sister was there, she could have been the one who told/set it up, so it doesn't matter if it was one or both Botkin kids (but I think it was both)

Quote:

That's what Gleb said, too. Tatiana told her. But the Leuchenbergs denied it, nobody knew anything about the animals but AA. Gleb mixed them all up, and she picked out the old ones that he made in Russia, "she seemed disturbed at seeing them, while she laughed at the others."

Were they watching and listening every second, and would they have ratted her out anyway? This is very weak. Something fishy was going on there, remember the Leuchenberg's son was convinced AA was an imposter. As for the pre/post war ones, I've heard they were dated on the picture. Even if they weren't, she was likely carefully coached and studied them. You see there really is no mystery here except who is guilty of helping her. As soon as the DNA came out all the little anecdotes were rendered useless.

Amazing how much speculation and accusations you allow when it comes to AA and her story, but none is allowed when it comes to the DNA and its source.
As for dating his drawings, yes, I have seen at least one with a date, but several without.
And I still have no answer to my previous questions.
One more for good measure:
How did she know that Anastasia used to wear a necklace of crackenel around her neck and eat some when she wanted it?
And who told her about the names of the regiments that her sisters commanded?

Chat, you still don't get it. The DNA and the stories of 'memories' are NOT on equal ground. The DNA beats everything. I have already posted in this thread a couple days ago the reasons the intestines were not switched at the hospital, and the reasons the tests couldn't be wrong (because if any one was wrong they all wouldn't match up and all making the same random error is impossible) This leaves us with only two possible conspiracy theories- one that it was switched after it left the hospital, the other that all the labs were paid off to fake the results. This leaves very, very harsh accusations against the scientists and labs, (as well as the Queen or perpetually unnamed rich bogeyman) and if you cannot prove it, then the DNA stands.

Then maybe you could clear up all of AA's memory of her former life, physical likeness and recognition by others using facts, instead of accusations, assumptions and homemade theories. It would be interesting to see what you can come up with.
It would also be interesting to know how Franzisca learnt to play the piano, draw and paint, embroider and play tennis.